Christelis N.O. and Others v Meyer N.O. and Others (916/12) [2014] ZASCA 53 (16 April 2014)

Christelis N.O. and Others v Meyer N.O. and Others (916/12) [2014] ZASCA 53 (16 April 2014)

The majority held that the appellants failed to discharge the onus of proving the existence and co-ownership of the assets allegedly removed by Lef Christelis. The evidence of Mr Livanos, the key witness, was found to be unreliable and riddled with improbabilities, lacking corroboration and credibility. The court found that declaratory relief could not be granted in respect of unidentified or indeterminate assets, and that the requirements for actio furtiva and actio ad exhibendum were not satisfied. The appeal was dismissed, with costs awarded to the respondents, subject to specific exclusions regarding unnecessary record preparation and legal practitioner fees. The dissenting judgment...

Citation
[2014] ZASCA 53
Parties
Appellant: Nick Christelis N.O.; Appellant: Anna Charalambo Christelis N.O.; Appellant: Olga Leonard N.O.; Respondent: Victoria Lena Meyer N.O.; Respondent: Elena Joaquim N.O.; Respondent: Emmanuel Christelis N.O.
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 April 2014
Case Number
916/12
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, subject to exclusions for certain legal practitioner fees and unnecessary record preparation.
Judges
Mthiyane DP, Mhlantla JA, Wallis JA, Legodi AJA, Mathopo AJA
Legal Topics
Actio Furtiva, Actio Ad Exhibendum, Co Ownership, Universal Partnership, Burden of Proof, Damages for Conversion
Civil Procedure Land and Property Delict Actio Furtiva Actio Ad Exhibendum Co Ownership Universal Partnership Burden of Proof +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nick Christelis N.O.

Appellant

Anna Charalambo Christelis N.O.

Appellant

Olga Leonard N.O.

Appellant

Victoria Lena Meyer N.O.

Respondent

Elena Joaquim N.O.

Respondent

Emmanuel Christelis N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants proved the existence and co-ownership of the assets allegedly removed by the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent unlawfully disposed of or concealed jointly owned assets with knowledge of the appellants' claim.
  3. 3 Whether the requirements for actio furtiva or actio ad exhibendum were satisfied.

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that the appellants failed to discharge the onus of proving the existence and co-ownership of the assets allegedly removed by Lef Christelis. The evidence of Mr Livanos, the key witness, was found to be unreliable and riddled with improbabilities, lacking corroboration and credibility. The court found that declaratory relief could not be granted in respect of unidentified or indeterminate assets, and that the requirements for actio furtiva and actio ad exhibendum were not satisfied. The appeal was dismissed, with costs awarded to the respondents, subject to specific exclusions regarding unnecessary record preparation and legal practitioner fees. The dissenting judgment...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, subject to exclusions for certain legal practitioner fees and unnecessary record preparation.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including those consequent upon the employment of two counsel, but subject to further orders.
  • The respondents shall not recover costs for complying with rule 8(9) of the Rules of this Court and 40% of the costs of perusal of the record.